The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The subject does not appear to be notable as an individual. She had little to no public role. She only got some coverage when she died, and that was
routine. The entire article revolves around her place on the family tree of the Spanish royal family, but
Wikipedia is not a genealogy website.
Surtsicna (
talk)
19:38, 1 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Comment The Spanish article does reveal some significant contemporary coverage of her wedding in 1936 by reliable sources, but I'm not sure that this counts for notability. Given her long life, it is possible that she received significant coverage in historical society publications that would be difficult to access and assess.
Hemiauchenia (
talk)
15:19, 2 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep. Pretender to the throne of Navarre.
This website isn't demosntration of notability itself, since it looks self-published, but it cites dozens of sources under Fuentes y bibliografíaFurius (
talk)
19:27, 2 May 2021 (UTC)reply
That she was a pretender to something is pure rubbish. The website indulges in a fantasy; she never claimed any throne or associated herself in any way with the long-defunct Navarrese monarchy. The sources do not demonstrate
significant coverage of the subject.
Surtsicna (
talk)
19:37, 2 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete a clear case of deposed monarchy cruft. The throne of Navarre seems to have ceased to exist in 1841. There is not even a clear place that it would applies to.
John Pack Lambert (
talk)
16:29, 3 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep. The significant aspect here isn't that she was pretender to Navarre, but that she was part of the royal family (and very close to succession, if
Alfonso XII didn't have children, she would've been queen:
[1][2]). Her funeral got significant coverage, even by the Daily Fail (
[3]) as well as several reliable sources:
[4],
[5],
[6],
[7],
[8],
[9]. Coverage of her was not limited to her funeral, here is an in-depth piece from her birthday in 2015:
[10] in
El Mundo. or coverage from ABC in 2015:
[11]. British royals much more removed from succession than Alicia are notable, she was very much part of the Spanish royals and has significant coverage.--Eostrix (
🦉 hoothoot🦉)07:17, 5 May 2021 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The subject does not appear to be notable as an individual. She had little to no public role. She only got some coverage when she died, and that was
routine. The entire article revolves around her place on the family tree of the Spanish royal family, but
Wikipedia is not a genealogy website.
Surtsicna (
talk)
19:38, 1 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Comment The Spanish article does reveal some significant contemporary coverage of her wedding in 1936 by reliable sources, but I'm not sure that this counts for notability. Given her long life, it is possible that she received significant coverage in historical society publications that would be difficult to access and assess.
Hemiauchenia (
talk)
15:19, 2 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep. Pretender to the throne of Navarre.
This website isn't demosntration of notability itself, since it looks self-published, but it cites dozens of sources under Fuentes y bibliografíaFurius (
talk)
19:27, 2 May 2021 (UTC)reply
That she was a pretender to something is pure rubbish. The website indulges in a fantasy; she never claimed any throne or associated herself in any way with the long-defunct Navarrese monarchy. The sources do not demonstrate
significant coverage of the subject.
Surtsicna (
talk)
19:37, 2 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete a clear case of deposed monarchy cruft. The throne of Navarre seems to have ceased to exist in 1841. There is not even a clear place that it would applies to.
John Pack Lambert (
talk)
16:29, 3 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep. The significant aspect here isn't that she was pretender to Navarre, but that she was part of the royal family (and very close to succession, if
Alfonso XII didn't have children, she would've been queen:
[1][2]). Her funeral got significant coverage, even by the Daily Fail (
[3]) as well as several reliable sources:
[4],
[5],
[6],
[7],
[8],
[9]. Coverage of her was not limited to her funeral, here is an in-depth piece from her birthday in 2015:
[10] in
El Mundo. or coverage from ABC in 2015:
[11]. British royals much more removed from succession than Alicia are notable, she was very much part of the Spanish royals and has significant coverage.--Eostrix (
🦉 hoothoot🦉)07:17, 5 May 2021 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.